How important is splitting wood vs. sawing?

[vinemaplebows]

My opinion is sawing is more efficient, and unless you are looking for that snake bow....or can't read wood, it is not important.....what do you think, and why.


VMB

[osage outlaw]

I hand split everything.  A split will follow the grain of the tree. 

[SLIMBOB]

Yep same as Clint. I have saw cut staves, elm particularly because it so tough to split, and if you read it right it works, but I hand split 99% of mine.

[Badger]

  Some woods it is not as important such as hickory and even yew. Osage it is essential to follow the grain or the bow will break. Quite a few woods it is real important. I have had pretty good luck straight sawing elm.

[Del the cat]

All depends how much timber you have!
I generally saw my Yew, there is plenty of opportunity for the drawknife to follow the grain, and once it's halved, I can see the grain and mark it out and saw it to follow the grain.
If stuff is too big for the bandsaw I'll spilt it.
Hazel and Ash I split 'cos I can get a ton of it.
Del

[vinemaplebows]

Then let me ask.....what about a limb bow? There is no way to split a limb bow, yet people, (including myself) make limb bows all the time.

[DarkSoul]

I don't have a band saw, so I split most of my wood. With small saplings I just cut out the profile with the axe. I used a jigsaw on a 3" diameter yew log that was too nice to make only one bow from, but too risky to split.

[dwardo]

I split out until I have an inch or so to play with width wise. Then I use an axe or bandsaw.
The split tends to show me the way. If its too small to split then its which ever tool to reduce.

On another point splitting to me has always reduce checking in smaller diameter hard to season woods like yew. I am guessing the split creates a more even stress on both halves as opposed to just sawing through grain,

[Benedikt]

I alway split my wood because of following the grain.
The only one which I saw is hazel, because it is often spiral growth, and even from hazel with spiral grwoth you can build nice bows!

[Marc St Louis]

Years ago I used to split everything including HHB and Elm.  Now I kerf then split.  If you are splitting a wood with interlocking grain then you will be wasting wood by splitting, been there done that, so you have to make your staves wider.  If your wood has spiral growth then you will be able to tell once the bark comes off and take appropriate action.

[vinemaplebows]

Marc, and Benedikt's comments is what I was hoping to see......although splitting is traditionally excepted as the "correct" way to treat logs, this is not always the case, and good bow wood does not need to be split to make a bow....unless you are a purist.

For me this holds true with hazel, vinemaple, yew, dogwood, ocean spray.


I asked the question about limb bows because the diameter of a lot of limb bows does not let you split the wood, therefore the wood "could" be twisted all the way through the stave, and many bows I have built that were limb bows were....yet they still shoot great, and after some tweaking (limb alignment) never had a problem. Just something to think about.

VMB

[Pat B]

I have no way of sawing big wood and I prefer split out staves to build bows. On limb or poles I saw them in half with my bandsaw, first making sure they were not growing twisted. This way I can usually get 2 staves from a 2" diameter pole.  The only option is to remove the wood from the belly side and only getting one stave.
 After I saw then in half I bind them back together with spacers between to insure they get good air circulation and remain relatively straight and untwisted as they dry. 

[vinemaplebows]

Pat,
             Large diameter logs I would split, at least to the point I could get it in my bandsaw, I have a pretty good size bandsaw. Much less waste with sawing.

[George Tsoukalas]

Either way is ok for me. I always follow the lateral or vertical grain for all woods, white or orange, anyway, during layout, even if the stave is sawed.
Jawge

[Prarie Bowyer]

Here is my experience.  If you want a stave split it and work it from a stave method.

If you saw, you must back the bow but they are great bows.  If you saw then your logs only need to be 40" .  You will aim to flip and splice matched pieces.  According to Bickerstaff bows (see you tube series on their process) it creates a more balanced bow.  I love this process.  I suspect master bow maker konrad voegelle is doing the same with his boo backed Osage bows.  Look closely at his pics.  Everything boo backed is quarter sawn.  After the conversion his bows push $800.00.  He holds significant awards in primitive archery shooting circles.  If he were selling junk I doubt he'd achieve all he has, or have the large waiting lists for his bows.

I've tried to saw staves.  Made a mess.  If you have a clean log then you may get more bows if you saw...but if you get a bad knot in one then you made handle laminations and you should have split and gotten a snakey stave.  It can be a gamble.   

My plan going foreword is to split first, then evaluate.  But big stuff I have drag nearly a 1/2 by hand.....so I lean towards cutting everything 40" and then split, and probably saw.

It is possible to splice staves so you could split it all.

I plan on splitting more going forward.

---edit----
Some blend of splitting and sawing may be better per vol.1 of the bowyers bible.  My library finally got me a copy.

Their method of splicing staves seems pretty slick.

What they saw about Osage twisting when drying then being useless for bows had me scratching my head.  This is why I probably prefer to saw board staves.  It feels like less waste BUT don't be greedy and saw too thin. I lost a lot to warpage.  I'll saw flinches next time around then resaw after dry.

I'm going to try and split saw staves from this next batch.